Stefania Pighin1, Lucia Savadori2, Elisa Barilli3, Silvia Galbiati4, Maddalene Smid5, Maurizio Ferrari4,6,7, Laura Cremonesi4. 1. Center for Experimental Research on Management and Economics, DCP, University IUAV of Venice, Venice, Italy. 2. Department of Economics and Management, University of Trento, Trento, Italy. 3. Department of Cognitive Science and Education, University of Trento, Trento, Italy. 4. Unit of Genomic for the Diagnosis of Human Pathologies, Division of Genetics and Cell Biology, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy. 5. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy. 6. Laboratory of Clinical Molecular Biology, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy. 7. Università Vita-Salute San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The appropriateness of the 1-in-X numerical format to convey quantitative medical probabilities is currently under discussion because of its distortive effect on subjective probability assessment. Previous research, however, always asked participants to imagine a hypothetical scenario. The aim of the present research is to support the existence of the 1-in-X effect in a real setting: when pregnant women have to evaluate their personal risk of Down syndrome according to their maternal age. METHOD: During the first prenatal visit, pregnant women were asked to evaluate their own risk of having a child with Down syndrome according to their age, when such risk was presented either in the 1-in-X or in the N-in-NX format. Then, they were asked to assess their risk of having a child with Down syndrome. RESULTS: Results showed a systematic higher risk assessment when pregnant women were presented with the 1-in-X format (mean = 3.57, standard deviation = 1.4) than with the N-in-NX format (mean = 3.03, standard deviation = 1.4), P = 0.007. Whereas the effect was shown to be not moderated by a differential comprehension of the two numerical formats, women with a low educational level and those who were at their first pregnancy were shown to be significantly more vulnerable. CONCLUSION: The present findings corroborate the existence of the 1-in-X effect in a real-world setting, showing that, in pregnant women, the 1-in-X format actually elicits a higher perceived risk of Down syndrome, compared with the N-in-NX format.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The appropriateness of the 1-in-X numerical format to convey quantitative medical probabilities is currently under discussion because of its distortive effect on subjective probability assessment. Previous research, however, always asked participants to imagine a hypothetical scenario. The aim of the present research is to support the existence of the 1-in-X effect in a real setting: when pregnant women have to evaluate their personal risk of Down syndrome according to their maternal age. METHOD: During the first prenatal visit, pregnant women were asked to evaluate their own risk of having a child with Down syndrome according to their age, when such risk was presented either in the 1-in-X or in the N-in-NX format. Then, they were asked to assess their risk of having a child with Down syndrome. RESULTS: Results showed a systematic higher risk assessment when pregnant women were presented with the 1-in-X format (mean = 3.57, standard deviation = 1.4) than with the N-in-NX format (mean = 3.03, standard deviation = 1.4), P = 0.007. Whereas the effect was shown to be not moderated by a differential comprehension of the two numerical formats, women with a low educational level and those who were at their first pregnancy were shown to be significantly more vulnerable. CONCLUSION: The present findings corroborate the existence of the 1-in-X effect in a real-world setting, showing that, in pregnant women, the 1-in-X format actually elicits a higher perceived risk of Down syndrome, compared with the N-in-NX format.